A. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing Vehicle)

(Recognized Crime Name: Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents)

(b) Violation of the Road Traffic Act;

Edials (80-11. Self-employed)

Residential Gyeongsan City

Reference domicile

Cho Young-hee

Attorney (National Assembly)

October 8, 2009

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of violation of the Road Traffic Act (In the instant case, the prosecution against the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is dismissed. The summary of the judgment of innocence against the Defendant is publicly notified.

1. Summary of the facts charged

The Defendant* is a person engaged in driving a vehicle;

At around 14:30 on September 30, 2008, when driving the above vehicle and driving the three-lane road of 50 meters in Daegu-do from the Yannam National University at Yong-Namnam University at the same time along two-lanes from the Yannam National University, it has a duty of care to ensure safety distance with the above-mentioned vehicle and prevent the accident in advance, but it has violated the duty of care to prevent the accident, such as securing and driving the safety distance from the above-mentioned vehicle from the Yannam National University at the Yannam National University at the same time * the victim A (70 years of age) who stops the vehicle in front of the same direction at the same time * even if the vehicle was found to be late after the vehicle, but the vehicle did not stop but did not stop the vehicle but suffered the bones of the bones of the body of the victim requiring treatment for about 10 days, and at the same time, the damaged vehicle did not immediately stop the vehicle and take necessary relief measures, such as repairing the damaged vehicle.

2. Determination

A. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes

(1) "When a person runs away without taking measures under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding a victim under Article 5-3 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" refers to a case where the e-mail of the accident brings about a situation in which it is impossible to confirm who caused the accident as a person who left the accident site prior to performing the duty under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the victim, although the e-mail was aware of the fact that the victim was killed or injured, such as aiding the victim. Furthermore, even if it is deemed necessary to take measures under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act such as aiding the driver and the victim's age, gender, and circumstances after the accident, even if the e-mail of the accident deviates from the accident site prior to performing the duty under Article 54 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, such as aiding the victim (see, e-mail, etc., Supreme Court Decision 200Do198).

(2) According to the results of inquiry into sources of the defendant and A, the police statement of the defendant and the defendant, the actual situation investigation statement of the defendant, the certificate of insurance coverage, the medical certificate, estimates, each investigation report (in the investigation records, No. 26, 27,60 pages), the field photographs, etc. (in the investigation records), and the court ***** Following the defendant's moving each part of his own vehicle to the right-hand door door under the agreement with A after causing the above traffic accident, and after checking whether the defendant was open to A, the defendant recognized and said that he would be liable for the accident to A, ② The degree of damage of the damaged vehicle was insignificant to the extent that it cannot be seen as the damaged part of the body, ③ the defendant and the defendant agreed to contact each other****1-1 mobile phone number of the defendant**** the mobile phone number of the defendant*** the defendant's cell phone number***

It is true that the vehicle has been abandoned and the area of the vehicle is cut off. * A shall affix the seal following the accident. 1 October 2008

The medical doctor was receiving physical therapy from the outside medical clinic and received the medication, and the medical doctor diagnosed A as the verte, bones, bones salt, and tension with the light that there is no credit for about 10 days in need of medical treatment. (7) The Defendant's driving vehicle is covered by comprehensive insurance, and the Defendant was not a drunk driver or a non-licensed driver at the time of the instant accident.

The circumstances revealed by the above facts and the following circumstances. After the accident of this case, A appears to be the part of the injury diagnosed by A and its degree, etc. after the accident of this case, although A did not have an intent to report the accident to the police but only reported by the defendant as the phone number that the defendant did not contact with the police, at the time of the accident of this case, A cannot be deemed to have suffered an injury to the extent that A was subject to relief measures from the defendant at the time of the accident of this case. In addition, even if the defendant knew A of the telephone number that the defendant could contact with the defendant by telephone, it cannot be concluded that the defendant could not be confirmed as having caused a situation where the person who caused the accident was absent from the accident site of this case, and there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise that the defendant escaped from the accident site of this case without taking measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act.

B. Violation of the Road Traffic Act (refence of accidents)

The purport of Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act is to ensure safe and smooth traffic by preventing and removing traffic risks and obstacles on roads, not to restore damage to victims. In such cases, measures to be taken by drivers shall be appropriately taken according to the specific circumstances, such as the content of the accident and the degree of damage, and measures to the extent that is normally required in light of sound form (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do787, May 14, 2009).

In light of the following facts, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant was required to take measures to prevent and eliminate traffic hazards and obstacles due to the instant accident, and to ensure smooth traffic, and there is no evidence to acknowledge this part of the facts charged. In light of the fact that the degree of damage of the damaged vehicle, as seen earlier, is insignificant to such extent that it cannot be seen that the damaged vehicle cannot be seen as being damaged on the land, and the Defendant and A are in contact with each other on the following day to make the back of the accident in a unreasonable manner, and they are driving away from the scene.

3. Conclusion

A. Therefore, the charge of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, among the facts charged in the instant case, should be pronounced not guilty on the Defendant under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act. As examined below, inasmuch as the dismissal of a public prosecution is rendered on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, the order does not separately render a verdict of innocence, and the charge of violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the failure to take measures after the damage in the instant case constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, thereby not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary

B. On the other hand, the facts charged in the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes include the charges of violating the Act on the Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, which are the summary that the victim was injured due to traffic accidents such as the stated in the facts charged. Thus, the judgment on the part of the facts charged is the case where a motor vehicle which caused a traffic accident under Article 3(1) of the Act on the Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act is subscribed to a comprehensive insurance under Article 4(1) of the Act on the Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, which is a crime falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter referred to as the "Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents"), and the case where a motor vehicle which caused a traffic accident under Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning

Judges Kang Dong-dong